HomerJay wrote:
This is content-free in a world where content is king.
The Australian Curriculum - history component addresses religion in an impartial contextual way. I am happy to provide the content of this curriculum if you require.
HomerJay wrote:
Implementation is all important. You mention you want religion taught at primary school but are you insisting it is taught to all pupils? Are you bullying kids into religious education?
The Australian Curriculum will be mandated. I haven't researched the primary element, but I'd be surprised if religion isn't given some treatment in primary school.
HomerJay wrote:
ATM in the UK primary school kids in the UK stay with the same teacher, have the same lessons all day. There is a right of withdrawal from religious elements, but like in the Oz system, there is no requirement for the school to offer an alternative, just a requirement to supervise the child to make sure nothing happens.
It is a very poor system, arranged thusly to prevent kids withdrawing and having a proper lesson instead. When I go to school in the morning there is often one or two children having some remedial lesson (reading/maths) before school. They have this out of hours so as not to disrupt the rest of the day. The schools could teach them maths and reading during the time wasted on religion but they are not able to. This is not fair on the kids and I would withdraw them from religion and then at least they could improve their reading, even if they are not taught.
You may have missed my previous post on my experience at school. I was one of those withdrawn.
HomerJay wrote:
So under your system of implementation are you going to offer alternatives or are you insisting on compulsion but with some form of withdrawal as exists ATM?
If kids withdraw and don't get the religious shit then, under your rules, has the child been failed by the school/teachers/parents because they haven't been exposed to shit (implicit in your assumption that kids need RE)?
I have stated a view, not a set of rules. History is one of the most controversial of topics in Australian education. It is the appropriate place to expose students to the religious nature of the world.
HomerJay wrote:
If you offer an alternative lesson then this would be (in the UK) the only time in the school day that the children are split up for different lessons, so you now need to double up on teaching staff (usually a teacher and a teaching assistant) just so that you can put non-compulsory religion onto the school day.
I think you are faced with a choice between compulsory attendance or an increasing drain on resources just to get religion on the agenda.
Neither of these are acceptable.
Agreed. There is no place for a religious studies lesson at school. Time and resources are lacking. But religion is a fact of the historical record, and students will be exposed to it through the mandated history curriculum. I would hope that it puts today's world into a better focus for the young people in schools. I do not propose anything more than that.
HomerJay wrote:
It's the lack of planning that we see from people who say that religion is important let's force it on 5 year olds, that leads me to dismiss all this as the cultural overlay charlou displayed. Why would people say let's force religion on children, without a consideration of how they were going to do it, unless there was a psychological rather than an educational reason?
Can I ask, would you extract the religious content from the history curriculum? Again, I am happy to provide this content should you require. It is rather lengthy.